Utilitarianism focuses on the belief that actions can be morally correct if the masses get more of the benefit than any one person. This differs from virtue theory greatly. While virtue theory looks at the history of one individual and those virtues effecting one individuals character, utilitarianism is a focus on the group. It is ones action that gives the group greater good, not an individual. Deontology is the theory that an individual does something because the individual believes it is the right thing to do.
The principle of utility also advocates that, the correctness or incorrectness of a deed is dependent on the ability for the action to lead to joy or sadness. If an action aims at supporting pleasure and preventing pain, then it rhymes to this principle, and it is morally right. On the contrary, if it does not aim at promoting happiness or preventing pain, then it does not match to the principle of utility, and it is morally incorrect. This principle is argued to be the morally correct principle of deeds at all situations. The principle of utility continually states that morally right actions produce happiness for all the affected people whose concerns are involved in the picture.
I disagree with certain idea and issue Rene Descartes argues about in his passage. His beliefs of skepticism at points were valid at times but every human has a right to believe, do anything or create what they want to believe in their mind. To make it feel real is up to the person because we control our emotions which control our mind set to think if we are being trick to having ten fingers or to believe there is no god that created this world we call earth. The scope of knowledge in this reading "Meditations on first philosophy" by Rene Descartes is the truth of doubt. Doubt causes people to believe that you do not know something when you actually do.
Mill explains that utility can be understood in terms of pleasure and the absence of pain and not just by the usefulness of something (Module 7.1). Utilitarianism at its root is maximizing happiness for as many people as possible. “The Greatest Happiness Principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness (Mill 14). Meaning Mill’s ethical theory of utility evaluates the moral worth of an action on whether it increases or decreases happiness (Module 7.1). Mill roots the Greatest Happiness Principle in his theory of life.
Intrinsic motivation exists inside people, in an alternate sense natural inspiration exists in connection in middle of people and exercises. Individuals are characteristically persuaded for a few exercises and not others, and not everybody is inherently inspired for any specific errand. Because intrinsic motivation exists in the nexus between a person and a task, some authors have define intrinsic motivation in terms of task being interesting while others have defined it in terms of satisfactions a person gains from intrinsically motivated task engagement ( Ryan and Deci, 2000, pg.
For example, a person fixated on the anal stage is usually described as being very obsessive and particulate. An advantage of the psychodynamic approach is that it shows how abnormal behaviour can be a result of unconscious conflict, which is why a person may not understand why they’re behaving a certain way or why different therapies aren’t working for them. A criticism of the approach is that it isn’t scientific or researched. Most of Freud’s findings are based on case studies which can’t be replicated or generalised to a wider population. There is also evidence that Freud exaggerated some of his findings to suit his theory.
Mills vs. Rawls John Stuart Mill’s view on moral decisions rests on the utility associated with an action’s happiness. Mill’s primary belief in the “Greatest Happiness Theory” which can also be called Utilitarianism is that those actions are desirable and right if they tend to promote happiness and pleasure and discourage pain. Mill says that all other things may be valued either for the amount of pleasure they involve, or for how influential they are in leading to pleasure. Human beings experience pleasures natural only to themselves, that animals do not have the capabilities of understanding or experiencing. These “higher” pleasures are higher in quality, but lesser in quantity.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UTILITARIANISM AND CONSEQUENTIALISM Utilitarianism and consequentialism are closely related but they are not the same. These two views have different approaches. Utilitarianism is a theory that evaluates happiness, welfare and well being. It states that everyone want to be happy and avoid any possible pain to the highest percentage of people. It focuses on what the goals are and how they can be achieved.
As human beings we ought to help each other out to succeed in our own destiny. “Even people who claim no entitlements to happiness would likely be in favor of reducing human suffering in the world”(Falikowski, Egoistic Versus Altruistic Utilitarianism, 2005). We must take a look into what the morality of this issue to understand why it is right or wrong. We can refer to Jeremy Bentham’s view on Utilitarianism when discussing this topic. The principle of utility states that the quality of life matters when it comes to pleasure, and if we were to make the quality of a person’s life better, we must be useful and relieve that person from pain and suffering.
Many studies in investigating obedience to authority have been questioned for its ethical issues. Milgram’s study has particularly been criticised for being ethically unacceptable. It involved deception, right to withdraw, consent and psychological harm. Participants were deceived as to the exact nature of the study for which they had volunteered, and by making them believe they were administering real electric shocks to a real participant. However Milgram could not have found results that truly reflected the way people behave in real situations if he had not deceived his participants, all of whom were thoroughly debriefed afterwards.